Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>> Jan Kiszka wrote: I start to believe we are arguing with different (miss-)use case in mind. Mine is definitely not about "helping" the user to switch the thread mode even more actively. It is about val

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Jan Kiszka wrote: > Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> I start to believe we are arguing with different (miss-)use case in >>> mind. Mine is definitely not about "helping" the user to switch the >>> thread mode even more actively. It is about validating application >>> states, it

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> I start to believe we are arguing with different (miss-)use case in >> mind. Mine is definitely not about "helping" the user to switch the >> thread mode even more actively. It is about validating application >> states, it is about thread state ref

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Jan Kiszka wrote: > I start to believe we are arguing with different (miss-)use case in > mind. Mine is definitely not about "helping" the user to switch the > thread mode even more actively. It is about validating application > states, it is about thread state reflection without any other actions

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Philippe Gerum wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Philippe Gerum wrote: >>> Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi, the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field contains far more flags than T_* is descri

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Jan Kiszka wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes >>> to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field >>> contains far more flags than T_* is describing and, even worse, comes >>>

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes >>> to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field >>> contains far more flags than T_* is describing and, even worse,

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes >>> to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field >>> contains far more flags than T_* is describing and, even worse,

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Philippe Gerum wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes >> to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field >> contains far more flags than T_* is describing and, even worse, comes >> with two collisions: T_PRI

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Philippe Gerum wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes >> to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field >> contains far more flags than T_* is describing and, even worse, comes >> with two collisions: T_PRI

Re: [Xenomai-core] rt_task_info.status encoding

Jan Kiszka wrote: > Hi, > > the documentation refers to the Native Task Status (T_*) when it comes > to documenting rt_task_info.status. That is not correct. That field > contains far more flags than T_* is describing and, even worse, comes > with two collisions: T_PRIMARY and T_JOINABLE are not r